The presentation examines the meaning, history, and theoretical bases for restitution; explores program issues and current knowledge about the implementation and effectiveness of restitution programs; describes current efforts to evaluate restitution programs funded by LEAA for both adults and juveniles; and raises further questions about restitution as a sentencing alternative and about the strategy for generating knowledge about it. Restitution and community service appear to be useful sentencing alternatives for the criminal justice system. Adovcates contend that they can punish, make clear society's disapproval of certain deeds, deter further offending, and rehabilitate offenders by permitting them to take steps toward their own reformation. Additionally, they are viewed by the public as fair sanctions that offer redress to victims and cost savings to the criminal justice system. Research in the past 5 years gives some preliminary indications of the extent and uses of restitution and community service sentences and programs; the variety of programs and their component elements; the administrative feasibility and cost effectiveness of many types of programs; and the attitudes of the public, victims, and offenders toward a restitution sanction. Troubling issues remain, however, particularly regarding the offenses and offenders for which different types and conditions of restitution sanctions are most appropriate and the sufficiency of various sentences in producing behavior change. Restitution is a broad concept with theoretical promise, popular appeal, and unsystematic empirical support that shows a potentially effective sentencing alternative for use with certain types of offenses and offenders. About 55 references are listed.